 | | Re: Studless Technic models
|
|
(...) Don't catch my on my every word, please, I'm not a native speaker so expressing some subtle feelings and so are rather hard for me ;-) I just think of studded beams/holed plates as a 'compatibility layer' between System and Technic. My old 744 (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jan-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Studless Technic models
|
|
(...) This is the same point I made earlier. Building with studless is hard therefore possibly damaging it's appeal to the kids who are supposed to be the market for technic. Adult users of Technic are I think very rare. And how with studless do you (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jan-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Studless Technic models
|
|
(...) Cool. :) It just makes sure we're all on the same page. (...) Actually it was specifically the words, "right to live" that seemed to indicate you felt these parts were dead, gone, deleted, discontinued etc. etc. Once again, this was why I (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jan-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Studless Technic models
|
|
(...) Yes. (...) I should have written 'the studless beams'. (...) Of course, I'm not against the studless beams. I'm against replacement of studded beams with studless in new Technic sets, rendering them incompatible with System. Technic (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jan-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Studless Technic models
|
|
(...) But this complication is unnecessary and doesn't bring anything new/positive. Rather the other things - studless beams are incompatible with System. That's a major issue. They had to design completely new pneumatics for it. We may also see new (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jan-04, to lugnet.technic)
|
